| ??? 03/03/07 19:00 Modified: 03/03/07 19:01 Read: times |
#134219 - no matter of defines Responding to: ???'s previous message |
I think, always every assembler support the EQU statement to define a number by a name to be used by bit intructions.
So replacing Y.., X.. by a number (0..255) may work. But the main difficulty may be to understand foreign sources. Thus I postet my source as a suggestion. Especially I have problems with delays inside code. I prefer always to call functions again after a delayed time, so the delay time can be used to do other things. This gives a real feeling of multi tasking. I have experienced, that a big delay make program extension almost impossible since it gulp many costly CPU time without any effect. A human think to do things in series (finish a task and start the next), but a MC like to do things virtual in parallel (doing only pieces of many tasks exact in time). So for good programming the human should change thinking. Peter |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Is there any better solution of Debouncing? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| specify | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| probably | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ultimately | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| no matter of defines | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| clear or not? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| X1,X2,X3 and X4 are Output of Keypad | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The Whole Code sir :-) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| how to | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| WoW what a complete guide... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| please explain | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| debouncing algorithms | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Well sir thanks for your help i have got it.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| my way | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| better? who knows | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| "help me" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
first, second, third | 01/01/70 00:00 |